| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| SecDef Panetta: President Absent Night of Benghazi |
| 2013-02-09 |
| Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified Friday on Capitol Hill that President Barack Obama was absent the night [of the attack on the Benghazi consulate] on September 11, 2012. Panetta said, though he did meet with Obama at a 5 o'clock prescheduled gathering, the president left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, "up to us." The 5 o'clock meeting was a pre-scheduled 30-minute session, where, according to Panetta's recollection, they spent about 20 minutes talking a lot about the American embassy that was surrounded in Egypt and the situation that was just unfolding in Benghazi. Obama did not call or communicate in anyway with the defense secretary that night. There were no calls about what was going on in Benghazi. He never called to check-in. Panetta says that the night of 9/11, he did not communicate with a single person at the White House. The information on the death of Ambassador Stevens, however, did make it to the White House. Video also at the link |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #17 And HILLARY, DepState subordinates, andor VPOTUS Biden says ... ....??? Since Hillary has stepped down, KERRY asnew DepState #1 sezzes ...??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2013-02-09 21:27 |
| #16 Don't hold your breath; the R's are tossing only slightly faster softball questions at all these various 'hearings/confirmations.' The only balls in the entire Capital building are down in the raquetball courts. |
| Posted by: USN,Ret. 2013-02-09 21:15 |
| #15 S'more - we can only "hope": http://weaselzippers.us/2013/02/09/lindsey-graham-i-will-hold-the-president-accountable-on-benghazi/ |
| Posted by: Uncle Phester 2013-02-09 20:50 |
| #14 From Uncle Phester's link: As [President Obama] told a Denver reporter in October: I gave three very clear directives. Number one, make sure we are securing our personnel and that we are doing whatever we need to. Number two, we are going to investigate exactly what happened and make sure it doesn't happen again. Number three, find out who did this so we can bring them to justice. Possible explanations: 1. The attack on the Benghazi consulate was considered a minor incident at the time, similar to the embassy attack on Egypt. 2. The attack on the Benghazi consulate was considered a minor incident based on the paucity of information. 3. The attack on the Benghazi consulate was considered a minor incident because, for whatever reason or a multitude of reasons, that was how the incident was presented to the President and the White House staff. 4. The President's management style is/was to leave such things to his subject-matter experts, who then proceeded to a series of decisions that led to the present state of affairs. 5. The consulate was, from the start, expendable. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2013-02-09 20:37 |
| #13 Also: Dereliction of Duty: Obama Did Nothing to Save American Lives in Benghazi--and Lied About It http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/02/07/Dereliction-of-Duty-Obama-Did-Nothing-to-Save-American-Lives-in-Benghazi--and-Lied-About-It |
| Posted by: Uncle Phest 2013-02-09 19:41 |
| #12 Photo of Obama during Benghazi raid - PENDING They're working on it. Good Photoshop takes time. |
| Posted by: KBK 2013-02-09 17:26 |
| #11 Photo of Obama during Benghazi raid - PENDING you won't see it. He's on AF1 kicking back with the phone off the hook, smoking a Kool |
| Posted by: Frank G 2013-02-09 14:18 |
| #10 Photo of Obama on the View - CHECK Photo of Obama on skeet range - CHECK Photo of Obama in Situation room during Abbattabod mission - CHECK Photo of Obama during hurricane Sandy - CHECK Photo of Obama at Dover AFB - CHECK Photo of Obama during Benghazi raid - PENDING |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-02-09 12:05 |
| #9 ...or not getting the do-do all over himself. Someone else has to take the fall. The buck stops over there ->. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2013-02-09 11:51 |
| #8 Panetta said, “He just left that up to us.” The unilateral decision to strike a sovereign country can only be made by the Commander-in-Chief. Think about it. President Obama delegated “that” decision to the Secretary of Defense. A more cavalier attitude for the operational chain of command hasn’t been witnessed since the Woodrow Wilson administration. One can only conclude Mr. Obama is only willing to fulfill his official duties when there’s a potential for personal gain. I know NewsFlash...right? |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2013-02-09 11:28 |
| #7 I concur P2k, but these are not "riddles wrapped in mysteries, inside enigmas". These hearings lack serious investigatory rigor. Ask the right questions and the answers and responsible parties will emerge. If congress elects to do otherwise, then they too become part of the problem. Forgive me, I've just stated the obvious. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-02-09 09:51 |
| #6 B, they can't find General Mireau? Paths of Glory stuff here. Obtuse reference to the responsibilities of command, its failures, the blame game and who actually pays the price for political intrigues. Human behavior seldom changes. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2013-02-09 09:35 |
| #5 If I were General Ham, I would have insisted upon seeing that one in writing with copies furnished my legal section. An unclassified, redacted copy would be stored away with personal papers in a safe deposit box. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-02-09 08:33 |
| #4 Well now we know how Obama handles that 3AM emergency phone call - take the receiver off the hook, cover it with a pillow, roll back over and go back to sleep. Funny how they can't determine who gave that stand down orders. It had to be signed right? Or are U.S. Military and Diplomatic commands in the habit of blindly following unsigned and unauthenticated orders? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2013-02-09 08:25 |
| #3 'Fish head and rot rule' obviously applies. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-02-09 08:03 |
| #2 Sgt. Schultz should sue for copyright infringement. This regime is despicable beyond my ability to describe. |
| Posted by: AlanC 2013-02-09 07:56 |
| #1 If true [which I find absolutely incredulous], then all we can assume is a campaign fund raiser was more important that the lives of 4 Americans, or perhaps the lives of the everyone in the Benghazi mission. Was the VP consulted? Was anyone in the administration consulted? If not, why not? If true, then who gave the order to "stand-down" that was reportedly radioed from the Chief of Station in Tripoli to the besieged station in Benghazi? Who gave the "stand-down" order to the Commander, AFRICOM, who has regional responsibility for the execution of Non-Combatant Evacuation (NEO) operations [rescue of American citizens] ? The key to this disaster now appears to rest with the testimony of General Ham. I will never accept the "there was no time to execute military action" story. The other key lies with the Chief of Station's senior representative and decision maker in Benghazi [one of the twenty some odd mystery people who cannot be found]. Penatta's testimony was weak, unacceptable, and very poor theater. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2013-02-09 06:57 |